For our second episode looking at Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal, we're speaking with Jim Malatras, the president of SUNY's Rockefeller Institute of Government. The institute is a public policy think tank based in downtown Albany, N.Y. and collaborates with UAlbany's Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy.
For our second episode looking at Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Green New Deal, we're speaking with Jim Malatras, the president of SUNY's Rockefeller Institute of Government. The institute is a public policy think tank based in downtown Albany, N.Y. and collaborates with UAlbany's Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy.
Photo credit: Rockefeller Institute of Government
The UAlbany News Podcast is hosted and produced by Sarah O'Carroll, a Communications Specialist at the University at Albany, State University of New York, with production assistance by Patrick Dodson and Scott Freedman.
Have a comment or question about one of our episodes? You can email us at mediarelations@albany.edu, and you can find us on Twitter @UAlbanyNews.
Sarah O'Carroll:
Welcome to the UAlbany news podcast. I'm your host Sarah O'Carroll. For our second episode looking at the federal Green New Deal proposal. I spoke with Jim Malatras, the president of Suny's Rockefeller Institute of Government. The Institute is a public policy think tank based in downtown Albany New York. Well, Jim, thank you so much for being willing to speak with me this morning.
Jim Malatras:
It's nice to be here with you.
Sarah O'Carroll:
I was reading that about a year ago in April, 2018 the Institute reviewed existing programs and outlined a roadmap for building successful coalitions to combat climate change. Can you share the major themes of this policy brief as well as some context for why the Institute took on this initiative to begin with? It seems like a big emphasis was placed on inter and cross institutional collaboration, both city and statewide.
Jim Malatras:
Well, we took it on because largely the federal government is going in a different direction. Some would say they're advocating their responsibility to regulate and move toward sort of cleaner energy future. So really was left to the state. So we wanted to say, "Okay. So what are States really working on?"
Jim Malatras:
One of the areas we looked at here was the regional greenhouse gas initiative called RGGR where nine States in the Northeast banded together to lower their carbon footprint and regulate carbon emissions. Basically it's like a carbon tax on some level and it's helped invest those dollars paying for dirtier sources of power.
Jim Malatras:
You take that extra money that you make off of that and you invested in renewable technologies, renewable energy and it's worked and other parts of the country have gone in that direction to band together state coalitions to do things. But I think that really is the future. And you've shown a net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions as well as investment in renewable energy.
Jim Malatras:
So we wanted to see what kind of models are out there as States are trying to make decisions about where to go now that the federal government's going in a different direction and there are a lot of successful models. One being written in Northeast here, which New York is part of other regional greenhouse gas initiative, which is the RGGI coalition.
Sarah O'Carroll:
Okay. What would you say you've learned in this past year and if you were to do a similar policy brief now, what would that look like?
Jim Malatras:
I think it's complicated on the other side actually. You mentioned the Green New Deal and the Green New Deal has different definitions depending on who you're talking to. I think what people who are really supportive of combating climate change run into now are the practical realities of policies that you choose.
Jim Malatras:
I think one of the things you saw at the federal level is aggressive policies. Proposals could be good, but they have unintended consequences potentially not just in real life but in political implications. The federal proposed for instance said, "We're going to have no more fossil fuel emissions in 10 years."
Jim Malatras:
Well, that's a dramatic change of how people live. No more combustible engines and cars, tractors, school buses. What do you do with flights? I think those practical things now are a serious thing that you have to consider. So how do States go about incentivizing electric infrastructure and renewable infrastructure that doesn't hurt everyday people?
Jim Malatras:
I think that becomes the conversation and I think coming up with a ground rule about who's affected and how fast they're effected are really important. I think the other thing people have to consider now is often in the renewable energy, climate change space, and before I was in government, I was working in environmental organizations.
Jim Malatras:
We're always good about saying we have goals and we try to out goal each other. Well, our goal is going to be a million percent renewables in five years. While then I have to make it three years. But they're just goals and they don't go anywhere. I think now there's such a need to do something. People don't want goals. In New York when they came up with a clean energy standard, it wasn't a goal, it was a mandate.
Jim Malatras:
That has real implications on people. You can only buy your electricity from certain sources of power. It has a cost to it. Is it a cost that the community or tax payers are willing to pay? I think now those things, now that the rubber met the road in some level, because climate change is real, becomes a real discussion that takes serious looks in a policy way about what the costs are to people, how it affects people's everyday lives.
Jim Malatras:
It changes the way you live and how fast you could possibly go doing that without saying to people, "Okay. People are going to have enough." Paris is the perfect example of that. That's where they sign the Paris Accords. We're going to unite as a world to lower our temperature because we feel global warming is real.
Jim Malatras:
They're rioting and protesting in the streets over a gas tax. So I think policy is great. Policy implemented is a much different thing, especially when people are affected. How do you balance both of those things become the key piece, because you do have to combat climate change is how you do it.
Sarah O'Carroll:
So what other guidance would you give to policy makers and how they communicate these goals and how that will affect most people in their daily lived life?
Jim Malatras:
I think you have to be honest about how you're approaching it, right? So sometimes you don't sugarcoat things because you can't sugarcoat it. If the threat is real, then be honest about this is what it means. Sometimes I think as policy makers, you have to engage not just with the issue advocacy organizations that you often engage with, right? In any political environment.
Jim Malatras:
You talk to the stakeholders who are really vested in the issue. But sometimes what gets left out of that discussion are everyday people who are often living their lives and not really paying attention until you do something that's so dramatically affects them, then they do pay attention after the fact. I think you have to engage the broader body politic as they call it earlier in that process.
Jim Malatras:
Or there's consequences not just politically where you may not win an election, but then there might just be a revolt against the issue that you're really truly believe in. And if climate change is real and if... Which it is real by the way and even when the US military say it is real. It's pretty real. But you want to make sure that you're successful in combating it.
Jim Malatras:
Sometimes I think we leave the people out through the process where we're talking to ourselves, either stakeholders or policy makers. You do something and then people are a little shocked by what just happened. Then reverses all the good things you do, because people sort of rebel against it. So I think involving the broader community earlier is an important component of this, especially when you're really affecting their lives.
Sarah O'Carroll:
How suited or position does the city of Albany, to achieve the state's climate change goals? I'm also asking what structural barriers there are that might affect policy implementation.
Jim Malatras:
New York is one of those States that have already been very aggressive on many of those issues. Authorization, retrofits, demand side, right? Part of it's just lowering your overall use of electricity and the heating and things like that. So you're not using fossil fuels, but there are, if you don't have a plan in place, you see the outcome.
Jim Malatras:
Westchester, let me give you an example. In Westchester for instance, there's a natural gas moratorium in all new buildings, which has sort of shocked people. What they're saying is, "We've run out of natural gas." But major buildings still rely on that for heating homes and cooking and things like that. That sort of shocked people.
Jim Malatras:
So in the abstract, people were like, "Oh yeah, this sounds great." In the reality, it's actually led to results that people may not want. So it's a complicated thing because it's largely costs. If you're talking about urban living in the abstract, people say, "Yes, this is great, but who's going to pay for it? And how fast can it go?"
Jim Malatras:
But you see many communities doing that now because of two things. State investments, seed money to help begin that. For instance, the state of New York under governor Cuomo in 2011 created an initiative, a $100 million fund to do smart growth in urban centers and that was, okay, put together plans.
Jim Malatras:
How do you do more regional transportation? How do you incentivize using electric buses? How do you build with a thought of green buildings as opposed to fossil fuel based things. That helped drive the private sector and other governmental sectors to say, "Okay. They'll help give us some money to do the right thing."
Jim Malatras:
I think you need those combinations on a big scale in order to get there, but not one person or one thing could pay for it. But I think you need that broader community based private sector, public sector regulations, financial incentives that sort of work together. States like New York do it really well. States like California do it really well, but you need the rest of the country to come along with that type of thing too if you want to do it on a national level.
Sarah O'Carroll:
So let's say that New York is successful in implementing the measures you've been speaking to on a reasonable timeline, would we be able to move the dial on the issue nationally if as these other States, as you said, would also be able to take these models? And what about globally?
Sarah O'Carroll:
I think I'm asking an existential question. Can we reasonably hope that we can save ourselves in time with respect to an increasingly warm biosphere? Because for many, this is the bottom line. Are we acting on this issue with too little, too late?
Jim Malatras:
This is always the classic chicken or egg problem, public policy. So internationally, the argument always is, "Well if China and India won't do it, why are we going to do it?" Because we're going to be at a competitive disadvantage. So we have to wait for them and try to incentivize them so we can't do anything until they do something.
Jim Malatras:
That model leads to everybody suffering longterm consequences as a result of climate change. Right? So I don't think that solves the problem. I think you do have to take an international leadership position. I do think the federal government made it clear that they don't want to take that, but I think people are willing to step up and say, "We'll, take that."
Jim Malatras:
I do think it has to be balanced. You can't put yourself at such a competitive disadvantage that you're losing jobs and you're losing economic output. But in many ways, what all this really translates into is green is good for the economy and that's where the future of the economy is. People aren't talking about making more fossil fuel cars in long run.
Jim Malatras:
It's how do you do battery storage, electric vehicles, solar panels, combined geothermal in your homes. That's the future. That's where the job growth is. Offshore wind is huge now. That's where a lot of the labor unions are going because that's where the job growth is going to be. So as long as you make it an economic model that's done in a smart way. I think waiting for other countries... They're going to take what you're doing because it makes economic sense to them.
Jim Malatras:
But you have to start. It can't be this like stare down, "Well, If they don't blink, then we're not going to do anything either." The climate doesn't wait for that argument. I think you have to do something. But I do think you have to do it in a way that you're not at such a disadvantage. And ultimately it's in your interest as a state, for instance, to get other states to move.
Jim Malatras:
The air we breathe isn't coming from New York. Those emissions are coming from the Midwest. Air doesn't stand still. Right? So if they're producing more carbon emissions because they're not regulating their power plants and other manufacturing facilities as heavily as we do, which is the truth, we're suffering as a result of that. So I think partially what we're trying to do is unite as different states together and say, "We'll all do this on the same page. So no one gets an advantage over anyone else."
Jim Malatras:
But there's certain principles to make sure that we're lowering our carbon footprint, protecting everybody, but still moving forward at the same time. So I don't think this wait and see approach is a good public policy proposal. Nor do I think quite frankly the climate can wait for that or the economies can wait for that or our health can wait for that. But I do think you have to do it in a smart balanced way.
Sarah O'Carroll:
I'd like to ask if there's anything at the Institute you'd want to mention, any ongoing research or other initiatives, any more policy briefs that I should have on my radar that you'd want to speak to in reference to climate change?
Jim Malatras:
Well, we're looking right now at a broad scale what we've been talking about today on the costs of climate, not just the economic costs, but the social cost of climate, which we're very interested in. Then how do you mitigate some of those things. You mentioned earlier today, urban centers you don't have... It's not brilliant social science.
Jim Malatras:
In the Bronx, we have very high rates of asthma. In many of our urban committees we have very high rates of asthma. That's where a lot of the geographic manufacturing was based because of political power. Those communities didn't have the same political power, so they're suffering the consequences of our post-industrial society. So there's a lot of environmental justice issues and things that we're looking at here.
Jim Malatras:
We look at it a little differently. We try to get to the large goals by showing here's the roadmap of getting to a large goals and here are some of the pitfalls as opposed to just do those large goals then everything will be okay.
Jim Malatras:
So we're approaching this to give policymakers some advice and data to say, "Here's what it means. You make the ultimate decision. There's some good things about very aggressive actions, some bad things about very aggressive actions, but here are the tools you make the decisions. So look out for us because you're going to see some things in the near future on those issues."
Sarah O'Carroll:
Thank you, Jim. Anything else you'd like to add?
Jim Malatras:
No. Thank you for having me on and it was a pleasure to do this.
Sarah O'Carroll:
Thank you for listening to the UAlbany News podcast. I'm your host, Sarah O'Carroll. That was Jim Malatras, the president of Suny's Rockefeller Institute of Government. If you're interested in hearing more on the Green New Deal, you might like our last episode where I spoke with two political scientists from the Rockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy about the proposals influence on the national debate on climate change.
Sarah O'Carroll:
The Rockefeller Institute also has its own podcast called Policy Outsider, where host Kyle Adams takes you outside the halls of power to understand how decisions of law and policy shape our everyday lives. You can let us know your thoughts about the UAlbany News podcast by emailing us at mediarelations@albany.edu or you can find us on Twitter @UAlbanyNews.